Essays on the Work Entitled Supernatural Religion | Page 3

upon this assumption the full light of modern critical principles; and, so
tested, it proves to be not only hasty and unwarrantable, but altogether
absurd. It is only necessary to compare the statements of highly
intellectual reviewers with the work itself; and every unprejudiced
mind must be convinced that 'the evidence is fatal to the claims'
involved in this identification. Out of five reviews or notices of the
work which I have read, only one seems to refer to our Supernatural
Religion. The other four are plainly dealing with some apocryphal work,
bearing the same name and often using the same language, but in its
main characteristics quite different from and much more authentic than
the volumes before me.
1. It must be observed in the first place, that the reviewers agree in
attributing to the work scholarship and criticism of the highest order.
'The author,' writes one, 'is a scientifically trained critic. He has learned
to argue and to weigh evidence.' 'The book,' adds a second, 'proceeds
from a man of ability, a scholar and a reasoner.' 'His scholarship,' says

this same reviewer again, 'is apparent throughout.' 'Along with a wide
and minute scholarship,' he writes in yet another place, 'the unknown
writer shows great acuteness.' Again a third reviewer, of whose general
tone, as well as of his criticisms on the first part of the work, I should
wish to speak with the highest respect, praises the writer's 'searching
and scholarly criticism.' Lastly a fourth reviewer attributes to the author
'careful and acute scholarship.' This testimony is explicit, and it comes
from four different quarters. It is moreover confirmed by the rumour
already mentioned, which assigned the work to a bishop who has few
rivals among his contemporaries as a scholar and a critic.
Now, since the documents which our author has undertaken to discuss
are written almost wholly in the Greek and Latin languages, it may
safely be assumed that under the term 'scholarship' the reviewers
included an adequate knowledge of these languages. Starting from this
as an axiom which will not be disputed, I proceed to inquire what we
find in the work itself, which will throw any light on this point.
The example, which I shall take first, relates to a highly important
passage of Irenæus [3:1], containing a reference in some earlier
authority, whom this father quotes, to a saying of our Lord recorded
only in St John's Gospel. The passage begins thus:--
'As the elders say, then also shall those deemed worthy of the abode in
heaven depart thither; and others shall enjoy the delights of paradise;
and others shall possess the splendour of the city; for everywhere the
Saviour shall be seen according as they that see Him shall be worthy.'
Then follows the important paragraph which is translated differently by
our author [4:1] and by Dr Westcott [4:2]. For reasons which will
appear immediately, I place the two renderings side by side:--
WESTCOTT. | SUPERNATURAL RELIGION. | 'This distinction of
dwelling, | 'But there is to be this they taught, exists between |
distinction [4:4] of dwelling those who brought forth a | ([Greek: einai
de tên diastolên hundred-fold, and those who | tautên tês oikêseôs]) of
those bearing brought forth sixty-fold, and | fruit the hundred-fold, and
of the those who brought forth | (bearers of) the sixty-fold, and of

twenty-fold (Matt. xiii. 8)... | the (bearers of) the thirty-fold: of | whom
some indeed shall be taken up | into the heavens, some shall live And it
was for this reason | in Paradise, and some shall the Lord said that _in
His | inhabit the City, and for that Father's House_ ([Greek: en | reason
([Greek: dia touto]-- tois tou patros]) are many | propter hoc_) the Lord
declared mansions_ (John xiv. 2).' | many mansions to be in the
(heavens) [4:3] | of my Father ([Greek: en tois tou | patros mou monas
einai pollas]), etc.'
On this extract our author remarks that 'it is impossible for any one who
attentively considers the whole of this passage and who makes himself
acquainted with the manner in which Irenæus conducts his argument,
and interweaves it with texts of Scripture, to doubt that the phrase we
are considering is introduced by Irenæus himself, and is in no case a
quotation from the work of Papias [5:1].' As regards the relation of this
quotation from the Fourth Gospel to Papias any remarks, which I have
to make, must be deferred for the present [5:2]; but on the other point I
venture to say that any fairly trained schoolboy will feel himself
constrained by the rules of Greek grammar to deny what our author
considers it 'impossible' even 'to doubt.' He himself is quite
unconscious of the difference between the infinitive and the